Current estimates of the relevant acoustic information in speech are typically inventory-based. They assume a set of phonemes or featural/gestural decompositions of phonemes exists in a language, and proceed to identify and rank/weight the set of acoustic parameters sufficient to distinguish a phonemic contrast based on data from instantiations of the sounds/categories comprising those contrasts in either a controlled set of real words in the language or in nonword syllables. Acknowledging that such contrasts ultimately derive from lexical oppositions, we present an alternative, complementary approach to the quantification of acoustic information in speech: one that is lexically based. Using acoustic data from the Massive Auditory Lexical Decision project (Tucker et al., 2018)—over 26,000 unique words produced by a single speaker of Western Canadian English—and listener identification data on a representative 240-word sample of that lexicon, we define a weighted network of the phonological lexicon (cf. Vitevitch, 2008), where the weights on links between minimal pairs correspond to the predicted acoustic similarity from a model fit to the listener error distributions. From this network the distributed, “global” information contributed by individual parameters operating in an ensemble of lexical oppositions can be estimated from changes in network entropy under perturbations of those parameters.
Skip Nav Destination
Article navigation
September 2018
Meeting abstract. No PDF available.
September 01 2018
Lexically dependent estimation of acoustic information in speech
Charles Redmon;
Charles Redmon
Linguist, Univ. of Kansas, 1541 Lilac Ln., Rm 427, Lawrence, KS 66046, [email protected]
Search for other works by this author on:
Allard Jongman
Allard Jongman
Linguist, Univ. of Kansas, 1541 Lilac Ln., Rm 427, Lawrence, KS 66046, [email protected]
Search for other works by this author on:
J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 144, 1723–1724 (2018)
Citation
Charles Redmon, Allard Jongman; Lexically dependent estimation of acoustic information in speech. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 1 September 2018; 144 (3_Supplement): 1723–1724. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.5067645
Download citation file:
77
Views
Citing articles via
All we know about anechoic chambers
Michael Vorländer
Day-to-day loudness assessments of indoor soundscapes: Exploring the impact of loudness indicators, person, and situation
Siegbert Versümer, Jochen Steffens, et al.
A survey of sound source localization with deep learning methods
Pierre-Amaury Grumiaux, Srđan Kitić, et al.
Related Content
Lexically dependent estimation of acoustic information in speech II: Minimal pair confusability
J Acoust Soc Am (March 2019)
A nonword is a word is a word: Perceptual evidence for neighborhood density effects in preschool‐aged children.
J Acoust Soc Am (April 2011)
Probabilistic phonotactics and levels of processing and representation in spoken word recognition: When is a word not a word?
J Acoust Soc Am (October 1999)
The influence of lexical characteristics and talker accent on the recognition of English words by speakers of Japanese
J. Acoust. Soc. Am. (February 2017)
Using acoustic distance and acoustic absement to quantify lexical competition
J. Acoust. Soc. Am. (February 2022)